The tantrum continues
The BBC on the campaign to shun Falkner:
The head of Britain’s equality watchdog is being investigated after bullying and discrimination allegations were made by staff. The claims against Baroness Falkner, and other members of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) board, were seen by Channel 4 News.
Baroness Falkner said she will present a “detailed rebuttal” to the investigators working on the case. Some campaigners say the EHRC is not protecting transgender rights.
But of course what “transgender rights” are is carefully never spelled out, because that would make it too obvious how they cancel women’s rights.
…Baroness Falkner advised the UK government that it was worth considering redefining sex as “biological sex” in the Equality Act, in an area that she described as “polarised and contentious”. A clarification to the Equality Act could make it easier to exclude transgender people from single-sex spaces.
That is, a clarification to the Equality Act could make it easier to exclude men from women’s spaces. Well guess what: men should be excluded from women’s spaces. If men are not excluded from women’s spaces then there are no women’s spaces any more.
Earlier this month, 30 LGBTQ+ charities led by Stonewall wrote to the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, saying the EHRC was a “failed institution” and “set on a course that would lead directly to a rolling back of trans people’s rights in Great Britain”.
But Stonewall thinks “trans rights” get to cancel women’s rights. Women think we should continue to have rights.
And once again the conflation of “gender” and “sex” just confuses the matter. “Transgender people” won’t be excluded from all single-sex spaces, just those that don’t match their sex. So trans-identified females would (presumably) be blocked from using the blokes’ changing room; is that really a violation of their rights?